Note that heavy armor in 5E does not provide any penalty to movement speed. The thief was faster than the fighter, but primarily for this reason. In the older versions of the game, back before backstab was a reliable ability, your movement speed was severely hindered by any sort of medium or heavy armor. That's all it really is.ĭM'ng and RPG's very nature is subject to individual interpretations. If your DM does not - at least I can say I understand why he did it. If your DM allows it - I'm happy for you. Just respect the guy that rules contrary to stacking. Implement it at your own game table, or find another DM - it's fine really. But all I am asking for is that IF a DM rules to go against the stacking - you give them their due, and understand why they did it. Flavor from previous edition? Didn't see it either. I still stand behind the ruling - Bonus Action: Dash does not stack on Dash. I just don't see it - in game history, intent, and flavor. I am sensing a lot of love for the triple dash. I'm just one guy, who thinks about what an ability was intending it to do.
Dash 5e full#
The triple dash - while built into the 3rd edition as full round run, was never exclusively a Rogue's ability.īut hey. The new rogue is a good representative of the thief/rogue of previous edition. I just don't think Rogues have thematically needed anything else aside from backstabby-stabbity, skill monkeyness, and shenanigans. And I will understand why other DM's will interpret it differently. Game-wise, unless I am sorely mistaken, Rogues have never been thematically/historically been the class with the 'fast movement speed' shtick. Being able to take 3 moves in combat doesn't mean the character is straight 50% faster than everyone else while while running or travelling. Just make sure you don't allow these out of combat however. Similarly, move + hide + bonus hide is somewhat similar to hiding with advantage, hardly game-breaking either. I don't think that a triple move (move + dash + bonus dash) is a commonly useful tactic, but then it's hardly game-breaking so if it comes up, I'll allow it. (I don't remember to ever have had a player Hide in combat, so I am not sure how common a tactic that one is). to be essentially immune to OA, as if you were Disengaging all the time, and still get your action and move, or you can choose to Dash for double movement again without giving up you action. In general, I think the motivation behind Cunning Action was to let the Rogue be more mobile in combat. I think technically these are both valid, but I wouldn't complain to a DM that decided otherwise to limit Dash and Hide to once per round.
0 kommentar(er)
